It is … adequate, in a barely sort of way, that Kiwanis has stepped into the hole left by the City’s food concession embarrassment at ARC to provide food and earn some money to fund their good work.

Still, this embarrassing misjudgement is typical of Abbotsford City Hall  and Council and yet again leaves one slowly shaking one’s head sadly at yet another faux pas.

Leaving aside the fact that the only way the public, the people who pay for City Hall and Council’s numerous misadventures, have any idea of what is going on is because the family who operated the Café had an opportunity to share their take on the situation with the public in the newspaper …

As a city you know that in February 2010 ARC will be hosting the Japanese speed skaters and the Russian figure skaters which will mean crowds and foreign visitors; that after that ARC will serve as an Olympic live site with more crowds and (possibly) visitors; so of course the course of action to take, if you are Abbotsford City Hall and Council, is to close down the Café in November

If you are the City of Abbotsford  you don’t wait until after the Olympics to address the situation –– that would be far to sensible. No you close it immediately in order to highlight Abbotsford’s inability to manage something as simple as a food concession

City Hall and Council spend over a hundred $million$ on vanity projects under the mistaken assumption they can buy their way into being considered a ‘Big’ city. They don’t understand that it is the little things, a decent place to have coffee after 11 pm or dinner after the movie or a hot chocolate while watching the skaters at the arena that are important. The little things that are the difference between being a well run, urbane metropolis as opposed to Abbotsford’s maladroit Keystone Kops routine.

Given the secrecy and behind closed door proceedings taxpayers cannot know the details of the dispute between the City and the operators of the Café. In light of the City’s ‘mushroom’ policy towards taxpayers (keep them in the dark and feed them lots of bu**s**t) the best information we have on the matter is the newspaper story giving the facts as the operators sees them.

I do know that, as so often happens, the City has taken actions without any consideration of the effect it will have on the Café. Actions that have had negative financial consequences for the Café; so that the claim the ex-manager waived the rental increase as fair compensation is realistic and believable.

However, the details and who is right or wrong is not what the City needs to focus on. The City needs to focus on answering the question of whether they want a food concession in ARC or not?

If they do not want a food concession at ARC management and council are behaving in a manner that will achieve that goal.

If however they want a food concession at ARC they must move away from their pie-in-the-sky, dollar signs in their eyes behaviours and get in touch with reality.

They could start by speaking to the long term regular pool patrons.

Of course they will need to hurry if they want to find any since more and more long-time pass purchasers are dropping ARC and moving to the less expensive private facilities.

Long term regulars would tell management and council that, in light of the market at ARC and the resulting fiscal realities for the operators of any food concession the city should be focused on the quality of the food and operation and that if the City wants a quality food concession the City will have to be prepared to charge minimal rent.

The reality here is that there were originally two families involved with the operation of the Jolly Time Café but the operation could not support two families. It cannot really support even one family and the operating margins are so thin that wages paid to a non-family worker results in an operating loss. Given the operating realities the market at ARC imposes it is hard to see finding a replacement that provides the quality product the ex-operators provided.

I know it is totally against their standard operating procedures and behaviours, but if city council wants a quality food concession at ARC they are going to have to acknowledge financial reality.

Should city council not want a food concession operating at ARC they are well on their way to achieving that.

Bob Bos was correct about one point concerning the proposed changes to Essendene Avenue – it is a “no-brainer”.

Any city councillor who would and did vote for this has no brain. Or alternatively has a brain but is brain-dead.

Essendene is the major connector for traffic travelling from the west side of Abbotsford to the east side of Abbotsford accessed via Old Yale Road for the simple reason there is no other even semi-convenient route from between west and east.

Say what you will about city staff, at least they had the common sense to recognize that with approximately 16,000 vehicles a day using Essendene cutting the number of lanes in half (from two in each direction to one each way) is a recipe for monumental daily day long traffic jam.

Not to mention the problems and congestion it cause on other streets and at other intersections as people seek routes to avoid a 30 plus minute traffic crawl through downtown old Abbotsford.

Bos stated “It looks busy with four lanes. Three lanes gives the impression of less traffic and will create a change in atmosphere.”

It does not just look busy it is busy. And that is with two lanes in each direction. Reducing traffic to one lane in each direction is not going to give the impression of less traffic – it is going to give the impression of a parking lot,

I do concede it will create a change in atmosphere. Although why Mr. Bos and city council feel the need to provoke road rage in downtown old Abbotsford …

“The two-block area of Essendene has more than a half-dozen vacancies and Bos said the lane alteration will change that.”

It will definitely change that. I am just not sure why city council or Mr. Bos think increasing the vacancy rate in the downtown core by driving the customers downtown businesses depend on to stay in business away from the downtown is a good idea?

Creating the planned traffic nightmare will cause those who absolutely do not have to go downtown to avoid downtown and cause those who have to pass through the downtown area to be focused on getting through the traffic jam ASAP, not on spending more time in backed up traffic by stopping downtown.

Apparently council feels they have not created enough fiscal problems for the city and feel compelled to waste $533,000.00 turning downtown into a disaster area.

Given the ruination council has brought about in city finances this is not only fiscally irresponsible behaviour, it is reckless and reprehensible behaviour.

Council does not have the money to do needed road maintenance but can find funds for this? Just what is council planning to cut from the budget to pay for this fecklessness? More fireman?

I would suggest that the salaries of those councillors who voted to turn Essendene into a virtual parking lot be used to pay for this debacle.

It is well past time council be held responsible for their irresponsible behaviours.